Cited by 175Light effects on plantsPolar Research and EcologyEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

Responses of plants in polar regions to UVB exposure: a meta‐analysis

NEWSHAM, KEVIN K., ROBINSON, SHARON A.·2009·Global Change Biology

Abstract

We report a meta‐analysis of data from 34 field studies into the effects of ultraviolet B (UVB) radiation on Arctic and Antarctic bryophytes and angiosperms. The studies measured plant responses to decreases in UVB radiation under screens, natural fluctuations in UVB irradiance or increases in UVB radiation applied from fluorescent UV lamps. Exposure to UVB radiation was found to increase the concentrations of UVB absorbing compounds in leaves or thalli by 7% and 25% (expressed on a mass or area basis, respectively). UVB exposure also reduced aboveground biomass and plant height by 15% and 10%, respectively, and increased DNA damage by 90%. No effects of UVB exposure were found on carotenoid or chlorophyll concentrations, net photosynthesis,Fv/Fm or Φ PSII, belowground or total biomass, leaf mass, leaf area or specific leaf area (SLA). The methodology adopted influenced the concentration of UVB absorbing compounds, with screens and natural fluctuations promoting significant changes in the concentrations of these pigments, but lamps failing to elicit a response. Greater reductions in leaf area and SLA, and greater increases in concentrations of carotenoids, were found in experiments based in Antarctica than in those in the Arctic. Bryophytes typically responded in the same way as angiosperms to UVB exposure. Regression analyses indicated that the percentage difference in UVB dose between treatment and control plots was positively associated with concentrations of UVB absorbing compounds and carotenoids, and negatively so with aboveground biomass and leaf area. We conclude that, despite being dominated by bryophytes, the vegetation of polar regions responds to UVB exposure in a similar way to higher plant‐dominated vegetation at lower latitudes. In broad terms, the exposure of plants in these regions to UVB radiation elicits the synthesis of UVB absorbing compounds, reduces aboveground biomass and height, and increases DNA damage.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.01944.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
NEWSHAM, K. K., & ROBINSON, S. A.
Affiliations
  • British Antarctic Survey (GB)
  • University of Wollongong (AU)
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-10-07
Volume
15
Issue
11
Pages
2574-2589
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2141923028
Cited by
175
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 14
FWCI
21.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Global Change Biology (publishedVersion)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • NERC Open Research Archive (Natural Environment Research Council) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Light effects on plants
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Polar Research and Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
UV-B radiation, bryophytes, flowering plants, Arctic vegetation, Antarctic vegetation, DNA damage, carotenoids, chlorophyll, aboveground biomass, leaf area, specific leaf area

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review